[Bwanajim]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.



QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2214001]Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.[/QUOTE]

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.

[Bwanajim]

Please tell me how old AK 47 or as you call it “a weapon of war” is different than any other legally own firearm? How does it function differently? I await your reply.

[Bwanajim]

These “assault rifles” cannot fire rounds, any faster than any other hunting rifle! They are semi automatic, which means one pull of the trigger is one bullet. They are not fully automatic machine guns! And in fact, my Weatherby hunting rifle has a bullet that’s four times as large. It does a lot more damage . I’m tired of the ignorance on this matter because people don’t educate themselves, they only go by what the MSM tells them. ������������

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Haggar

What is the basis for that statement? How many times has that happened? Many? - it happens occasionally I suppose but I can't really recall reading about it more than a few times in my lifetime.

I did read recently about the youth who was shot because he knocked on the wrong door.

We're thought about having a gun in the house. However don't really seeing us being the winner in a shoot-out.

It is estimated by a number of different sources that legally armed citizens stop an aggressive assault/robbery nearly 2 million times a year. Many times, just brandishing their weapon stopped the attack before it started. Take your time on you tube and you can watch hours of videos from television stations across the U.S. reporting on armed citizens that saved themselves or another person. I sat one night and watched them for nearly 2 hours before I got tired and quit. Naturally you aren't going to see this on the national news networks because it refutes their anti-gun narrative. However, they never hesitate to incessantly broadcast and re-broadcast instances where a bad guy kills someone.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Cybersprings

Attempting to have an intellectual discussion with some people is so challenging.

You post the links to 4 different articles on what supposed scholars believe the founding fathers meant. Not one was to a court decision.

I post the text of what the founding fathers actually said, and say I take the word of them, over what supposed scholars say they meant. You have nothing to refute their words, so you reply that it is the courts that will decide what they meant.

Then why did you post worthless links to commentaries other than the courts?

And I don't disagree that the courts will decide, but that does not mean they will be correct. We just have to accept their decisions, correct or not. At least until we get the opportunity to correct any errors they made, e.g Plessy vs Ferguson and Roe V. Wade.

The quotes you listed are in very plain and simple terms that even a 10 year old can understand. There is nothing in what they said that can be construed any differently than as written.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Bwanajim

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.



QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2214001]Would you allow homeowners to plant land mines, use grenades, flamethrowers, etc. to protect themselves? Probably not as they could easily blow themselves up or burn their homes down.

Flamethrowers, grenades, land mines are for warfare as also are assault weapons of various kinds.

A ban of some weapons meant for battlefields would at least cut down the flow of these into some areas and into some hands. Red flag laws and close monitoring of those with mental illness by friends, co-workers, and family could also help.

Please tell us exactly what a “assault weapon is“ and how it’s different from other firearms. I await your reply.[/QUOTE]
An assault rifle is relatively light with a short barrel and a semi-automatic action with the capability to go full automatic. A key point is the cartridge used in the weapon. The cartridge must have a high velocity to cause bad wounds and ALSO to have a flat trajectory out to about 300 yds so it is easy for the soldier to use without changing sights or consulting a trajectory table. Also, the cartridge MUST have low recoil because most soldiers have problems with recoil and may flinch or jerk the trigger. So, high velocity and low recoil demand a 22 caliber cartridge and the .223 fits that bill. Also, the small caliber allows MORE ammo to be carried.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Bwanajim

Please tell me how old AK 47 or as you call it “a weapon of war” is different than any other legally own firearm? How does it function differently? I await your reply.

The main attribute of the AK 47 was it was easy to produce and manufacturing tolerances did NOT have to be exact. Because of this, it could be THROWN into a mud puddle and other abuse and it would come up FIRING.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

What I happening in Florida is just Woke shenanigans mainly by a man in political office.

I think people who read this know whom I am talking about here. I am trying to keep this from getting too political. WOKE is a new dog whistle and would fit right in with the novel 1984.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Cybersprings

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.

Lots of similarities - Hitler attacked his foil, the Jewish people. In Florida they attack Mickey Mouse. And school teachers and school children. Notice.........just some available group that is relatively weak.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Cybersprings

Exactly my point. But, that is the comparison made in this thread by multiple people. Glad we can agree on one point...it is absolutely rediculous to compare what is happening in FL to Nazi Germany.

NOT so ridiculous!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Cybersprings

I couldn't read the NYT article without paying, and that definitely wasn't going to happen.

I guess our disagreement is based on different definition of terms, exacerbated by people who compare books being banned in schools with Nazi Germany.

Books banned by Nazi Germany were burned and not allowed to be owned. Books banned in Florida (NOT BY STATE OF FLORIDA, but by local school districts) are banned only from public schools while parents and others are allowed to own them and provide them to their children if they so desire. Major difference.

There are many cases that uphold that banning books in schools violates the first amendment. The only Supreme Court case I could find was a 4-4 split. So, that cannot be considered settled law.

But, I would like you to go on record as supporting Playboy, Penthouse, and Guns and Ammo, or the Shades of Gray series in Public schools because the children have a first amendment right to them. If you do support that, we know where you stand. If you don't support that, we know that you are a hypcrite.

Book baning like any BAD policy can start out small and then expand into burning like in Fascist Germany.

[TeresaE]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Live updates: Atlanta Midtown shooting news

I recall writing a top lawyer in San Francisco at a law firm which had just had a shooting inside and he had written back to me that they did not have the resources to do anything about addressing the needs of survivors/victims of these kind of crimes. One of which had just happened at his law firm.

My concern in writing the lawyer was access to practical materials for survivors/victims of crimes in SF Bay Area law libraries and other kinds of libraries.

But I do think that law firm was a major driver towards a assault weapons ban that went into effect. 101 California Street shooting - Wikipedia

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - Wikipedia

I remember this shooting. It was a personal beef between the shooter and the law firm. SFPD SWAT was on the scene immediately because they were doing training exercises nearby. There was so much confusion from the 911 calls that the SWAT team thought there were multiple shooters not just one guy. But no matter how fast the cops respond they will never be there in time to stop these nuts. Only another gun will. That’s a sad fact. The gun restrictions enacted post event are meaningless. Until we find a way to end jealousy, greed, anger and rage we will have violence. As a species we must own that.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by TeresaE

I remember this shooting. It was a personal beef between the shooter and the law firm. SFPD SWAT was on the scene immediately because they were doing training exercises nearby. There was so much confusion from the 911 calls that the SWAT team thought there were multiple shooters not just one guy. But no matter how fast the cops respond they will never be there in time to stop these nuts. Only another gun will. That’s a sad fact. The gun restrictions enacted post event are meaningless. Until we find a way to end jealousy, greed, anger and rage we will have violence. As a species we must own that.

Except that the kind of guns used often will allow the perpetrator to murder far more people. Thinking of the scenes from Saving Private Ryan and the weapons used during that landing. Those kind of weapons used in battles should be restricted to the military as much as possible. Something like them was pointed at a crowd in Las Vegas at a country-western concert by a man who collected weapons if memory serves. Stephen Paddock - Wikipedia AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia ArmaLite AR-10 - Wikipedia

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Except that the kind of guns used often will allow the perpetrator to murder far more people. Thinking of the scenes from Saving Private Ryan and the weapons used during that landing. Those kind of weapons used in battles should be restricted to the military as much as possible. Something like them was pointed at a crowd in Las Vegas at a country-western concert by a man who collected weapons if memory serves. Stephen Paddock - Wikipedia AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia ArmaLite AR-10 - Wikipedia

The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock. I don't think they were used during Saving Private Ryan times by the military as they had actual automatic weapons. Movie scenes are not real, but fantasy, just like some of the allegations in your arguments.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

The Las Vegas shooter used a bump stock. I don't think they were used during Saving Private Ryan times by the military as they had actual automatic weapons. Movie scenes are not real, but fantasy, just like some of the allegations in your arguments.

My late father of my sister-in-law landed in Normandy a few weeks after that battle and he found Saving Private Ryan very realistic. He met people who had been there on D-Day.

And you people are sure bringing up the personal attacks a lot. I never said that the Nazis had bump stocks. They had MG 42 - Wikipedia which is an very fast firing machine gun.